Single party consent means one of the people being recorded must give permission to record … full stop.

This is true.

What you don’t understand is that a person does not have to be actively speaking or being directly spoken to in order to be a part of a conversation. Simply being present, with the other participants fully aware of your presence while continuing to converse makes you part of their conversation and thus a party able to consent to it’s recording.

The key there is that the other participants are aware of your presence. You’re not hiding around a corner, listening in unbeknownst to them; the people conversing are entirely aware that you are present and likely listening.

By your rational a police agent without a warrant could walk by and say “hello”, plant a listening device, then record your conversation because he said hello at the start.

No. In that situation a third party inserted themselves into your conversation entirely of their own volition.

This is like you walking up to someone that’s streaming/vlogging in public, beginning an unrelated conversation in front of them; then you getting upset that they are recording the conversation that you began in their presence. Even if you weren’t aware they were streaming; you were the one that inserted yourself into that situation. They didn’t walk up to/join you; you made them a party by bringing the conversation to them.

A really big part of these types of legal situations is ‘reasonable expectation of privacy’. The people inside a vehicle are all pretty close together and obviously going to be able to hear the conversions that are happening. It’s unreasonable to expect the driver who’s head is ~3 feet from you isn’t privy to your conversation.

In a situation like this; you’ve entered the drivers vehicle and began a conversation in their immediate presence fully aware that they are able to hear and listen to you. That makes the driver a party to your conversation, even without actively participating in it.

Canada has single-party consent laws when it comes to audio recording.

I hate this use and that I’m arguing devils advocate here, but legally speaking; If the driver opted-in to the program, audio in the vehicle can legally be recorded because the driver is considered a party to the conversion that’s happening within their vehicle (even without actively participating in that conversion). They can record and distribute that recording however they like (including to lyft to be transcribed).

Lyft wouldn’t be able to record vehicle audio without the consent of the driver at the minimum; but they aren’t necessarily required to gain consent or even inform the other passengers. As shitty as that is.

Don’t treat your driver like they don’t exist and keep private conversations for when your actually in private. Even a regular cab driver could be privately recording you; regardless of ‘company policy’.

Another way to think of this is: You can record the audio in your immediate vicinity (ie, anything you can naturally hear) without having to gain consent from or inform everyone around you. Same concept.

NTD is the European version of DMCA essentially.

It’s not a good thing; but usenet providers like any other internet service are generally subject to one or the other depending on their location, so it’s good to know which one covers the provider you use.

With providers spread across the globe, mirroring each others data, and subject to different copyright notice/takedown laws; the whole system is quite robust against removals. While you can send notices to individual providers, It’s extremely difficult to coordinate a global takedown effort and truly remove content from usenet as a whole.

That’s why multiple provider’s in different regions can be beneficial. Some people will buy ‘block’ accounts (a fixed amount of data to be used as needed, vs a monthly cap) for a provider in a separate region to fallback on when the data has been taken down from their local provider.

Retention refers to how long a particular provider keeps the data users upload. 3-5k days is pretty typical, but there are some lower ones. Data is also mirrored across the backbones of all the different providers; so if it’s removed from one (due to retention or a takedown notice) it’s still available on others.

I’ve had little to no issue finding content, with 97% of data I’ve requested being available (stats from SabNZBD); but in the off chance you want something that is unavailable, most indexers have a requests section.

Similar to setting up torrenting, usenet indexers/clients can be added to the arr stacks for automation. I’m not sure about Kodi/Real Debrid as I don’t use those.

In short, you need three things: (here’s what I’ve been using)

An indexer: NZBgeek Just like a torrent indexer, but for .nzb files instead of .torrents

A provider: Frugal Usenet Where you’re downloading data from.

And a client: SabNZBD

When it comes to which provider to choose; pretty much all of them provide similar retention and unlimited data cap, so you really just need to look for something nearby. Often people will recommend having 2 providers one covered by DMCA and one covered by NTD to make content more available; but I’ve not really noticed a need.

Map of providers

Meh, switch to usenet. Download as much as you want, at max bandwidth 100% of the time, with 0 need for a vpn and no obligation to re-seed content for months on end.

Oculus was dead to me the moment it was announced Facebook was purchasing them.